What is the Study of Jury Decision Making About and What Should it be About?

  • Richard L. Wiener


Sexual Harassment Racial Bias Punitive Damage Mock Juror Damage Award 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bornstein, B. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bornstein, B.H., & McCabe, S.G. (2005). Jurors of the absurd? The role of consequentiality in jury simulation research. Florida State Law Review, 32, 443–467.Google Scholar
  3. Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field settings. Chicago, Illinois: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  4. Diamond, S.S., Vidmar, N., Rose, M., Ellis, L., & Murphy, B. (2003). Jury discussions during civil trials: Studying an arizona innovation, University of Arizona Law Review, 45, 1–81.Google Scholar
  5. Forgas, J. (2001). Affect and information processing strategies: An interactive relationship. In J.P. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 253–282). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Hastie, R., Schkade, D.A., & Payne, J.W. (1998). A study of juror and jury judgments in civil cases: Deciding liability for punitive damages. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 287–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Higgins, E.T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lerner, J.S., & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgment and choice. Cognition and Emotion, 14, 473–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lerner, J.S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 146–159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lerner, J.S., & Tiedens, L.Z. (2006). Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19, 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mitchell, T.L., Haw, R.M., Pfeifer, J.E., & Meissner, C.A. (2005). Racial bias in mock juror decision-making: A meta-analytic review of defendant treatment. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 621–637.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51, 242–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1988). Explanation-based decision making: The effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 521–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1991). A cognitive theory of juror decision making: The Story Model. Cardozo Law Review, 13, 519–557.Google Scholar
  16. Pennington, N., & Hastie, R. (1992). Explaining the evidence: Tests of the story model for juror decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pfeifer, J.E., & Ogloff, J.R.P. (1991). Ambiguity and guilt determinations: A modern racism perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1713–1725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  19. Smith, C.A., & Ellsworth, P.C. (1985). Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(4), 813–838.Google Scholar
  20. Van Boven, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2005a). Cross-situational projection. In M. Alicke, J. Krueger, & D. Dunning (Eds.), Self and social Judgment (pp. 43–64). Psychology Press: New York.Google Scholar
  21. Van Boven, L., & Loewenstein, D. (2005b). Empathy gaps in emotional perspective taking. In S. Hodges & B. Malle (Eds.), Other minds: How humans bridge the divide between self and others (pp. 284–297). Guilford Press: New York.Google Scholar
  22. Van Boven, L., Loewenstein, G., & Dunning, D. (2005). The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 130–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wiener, R.L. (2003). Death penalty research in Nebraska: How do judges and juries reach penalty decisions? Nebraska Law Review, 81, 301–320.Google Scholar
  24. Wiener, R.L. (2007). Law and Everyday Decision-Making: Descriptive and Normative Models (2007). In Wiener, R.L., Bornstein, B.H., Schopp, R., & Willborn, S. (Eds.) Social Consciousness in Legal Decision Making: Psychological Perspectives. (pp. 3–34) New York: Springer Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wiener, R.L., Block-Lieb, S., Gross, K., & Baron-Donovan, C. (2005). Unwrapping assumptions: Applying social analytic jurisprudence to consumer bankruptcy law and policy. American Bankruptcy Law Journal, 79, 453–483.Google Scholar
  26. Wiener, R.L., Bornstein, B.H., & Humke, A. (2006). Emotion and the law: A framework for inquiry. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 231–248.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wiener, R.L., Hackney, A., Kadela, K., Rauch, S., Seib, H., Warren, L., & Hurt, L.E. (2002). The fit and implementation of sexual harassment law to workplace evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 747–764.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wiener, R.L., Holtje, M., Winter, R.J., Cantone, J.A., Block-Lieb, S., & Gross, K. (2006). Psychology and BAPCPA: Enhanced disclosure and emotion. Missouri Law Review, 71, 1003–1033.Google Scholar
  29. Wiener, R.L., & Hurt, L.E. (2000). How do people evaluate social-sexual conduct: A psycholegal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 75–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wiener, R.L., Hurt, L.E., Thomas, S.L., Sadler, M.S., Bauer, C.A., & Sargent, T.M. (1998). The role of declarative and procedural knowledge in capital murder sentencing. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 124–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wiener, R.L., Pritchard, C.C., & Weston, M. (1995). Comprehensibility of approved jury instructions in capital murder cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 455–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wiener, R.L., Richmond, T.L., Seib, H.M., Rauch, S.M., & Hackney, A.A. (2002). The psychology of telling murder stories: Do we think in scripts, exemplars, or prototypes? Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 20, 119–139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wiener, R.L., Rogers, M., Winter, R., Hurt, L.E., Hackney, A., Kadela, K., Seib, H., Rauch, S., Warren, L., & Morasco, B. (2004). Guided jury discretion in capital murder cases: The role of declarative and procedural knowledge. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10(4), 516–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Wiener, R.L., Voss, A.M., Winter, R.J., & Arnot, L. (2005). The more you see it, the more you know it: Memory accessibility and sexual harassment judgments. Sex Roles, 53, 807–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wiener, R.L., Winter, R., Rogers, M., & Arnot, L. (2004). The effects of prior workplace behavior on subsequent sexual harassment judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 28(1), 47–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wilson, T., & Gilbert, D.T. (2005). Affective forecasting. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(3), 131–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wilson,T.D., & Gilbert, D.T. (2003). Affective forecasting. In M.P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 345–411). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard L. Wiener
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of NebraskaLincoln

Personalised recommendations